Jump to content
Hockey Wilderness
  • Why Don't Other Teams Follow Guerin's Model?


    Image courtesy of Joe Nicholson-USA TODAY Sports
    Tom Schreier

     

    In May, Bill Guerin declared his goal wasn’t to make it to the second round because the NHL won’t put the Minnesota Wild’s name on the Stanley Cup for winning a playoff series. In October, he locked Marcus Foligno, Mats Zuccarello, and Ryan Hartman into long-term contracts with no-move clauses. At the season's midpoint, Guerin declared that he wouldn’t “wave the white flag” even though the Wild were outside the playoff picture.

    Guerin’s point about the second round is that he didn’t construct the roster to only win one playoff series. He’s trying to build a contender. However, he’s locking veterans into long-term deals for cost certainty because he bought Zach Parise and Ryan Suter out. Therefore, the Wild have roughly $15 million in dead cap this year and next. Guerin said he wouldn’t give up on this season because he believes in the roster he’s built. Also, he can’t. He’s locked most of the players he’d trade into long-term deals.

    Catch the Wild on the right day, and Guerin looks like a genius. They beat the defending champion Vegas Golden Knights on the road on February 12. Five days later, Joel Eriksson Ek and Kirill Kaprizov had hat tricks in a 10-7 win over the Western Conference-leading Vancouver Canucks. Last Friday, Minnesota beat Connor McDavid and the Edmonton Oilers in Alberta. The Wild have won seven of their last nine games since the All-Star Break and continue to hover close to the final wild-card spot.

    How could Guerin not believe in this roster? How could anyone doubt them?

    Because he’s created hockey’s most chaotic team. Catch them at the wrong time, and they look hopeless. The Wild lost seven straight games in November and got Dean Evason fired. They won their first four games under John Hynes before losing in Vancouver and Edmonton. Minnesota won its next four, then dropped eight of their next nine. They won three straight before the break but dropped crucial games to the Nashville Predators and Anaheim Ducks. The Wild beat Vegas and lost to the Buffalo Sabres; they stormed back to beat Vancouver and lost in Winnipeg.

    We don’t know what the Wild are because they don’t have an identity. They’re offensive juggernauts one night and can’t score the next. They can hang with the best teams in the West, then lose to Anaheim and Buffalo. But the one constant is that this team seems to genuinely like each other. It helps that Guerin paid everyone. Winning and money make everyone happy, and the Wild seem to win enough to offset the frustration of their frequent losing streaks. 

    Still, it’s hard to say Guerin has done everything he can to build a good culture. Guerin “mutually parted ways” with his cap guy, and the NHL investigated Guerin for verbal abuse earlier this year. But the front office turmoil hasn’t seeped into Minnesota’s play on the ice. Whether the players moved on from the news quickly or have fully isolated themselves, they seem to navigate most of the adversity they face with aplomb. 

    But it might not be enough to get them into the playoffs. The Wild stacked the odds against themselves early by losing so frequently under Evason, then continued to compound the issue by playing inconsistent hockey. But they are resilient. That’s a trait any front office would want in its team. So why don’t more general managers take Guerin’s approach and lock everyone in?

    In many ways, Guerin is acting out of necessity. He has chosen to try to build a winner while the team is in cap hell. Therefore, he values cost certainty. But imagine if Guerin had an extra $15 million to work with. He could have Kevin Fiala ($7.875 million cap hit), Matt Dumba ($3.9 million), and [italics] additional cap space. Hynes could put Marco Rossi on a line with Fiala when he has Kaprizov, Eriksson Ek, and Matt Boldy on the top line. Rossi would have a scoring wing on his line, and Dumba would shore up Minnesota’s blue-line depth.

    I know that’s not how it works. The Wild wouldn’t have Brock Faber and his boundless energy eating up minutes if they hadn’t traded Fiala, and Dumba became a cap casualty. But the issue with Guerin’s approach isn’t that he overspent on Marcus Johansson, Alex Goligoski, and John Merrill. Every team has bad contracts. It’s that Guerin has no contingency plan. He’s tied Minnesota’s fate to Foligno, Zuccarello, Hartman, and Frederick Gaudreau, four players he could have moved at this year’s deadline.

    The Wild easily could lose in the first round again. They’re a one-line team relying on 39-year-old Marc-Andre Fleury because Filip Gustavsson is having a down year. Minnesota could also miss the postseason altogether. It’s hard to win in the playoffs when an opposing team can dedicate all its resources to stopping Kaprizov’s line. We’ve seen that before. The only tried-and-true method for one-line teams to go on playoff runs is to lean on a hot goaltender. That’s a lot to ask of Fleury.

    If this team loses in the first round for the eighth time in nine seasons or their season ends on April 18, the Wild will also have missed an opportunity to draft a scoring wing to pair with Rossi. Therefore, opponents will continue to focus on limiting Kaprizov. By locking many of his veterans into long-term deals, Guerin had to go all in on a flawed team without an identity. He had [italics] to believe in them. Missing the playoffs is a failure, given the opportunity cost of missing out on a high pick. So is losing in the first round.

    Guerin has made reaching the second round the Wild’s Stanley Cup.

     

    Think you could write a story like this? Hockey Wilderness wants you to develop your voice, find an audience, and we'll pay you to do it. Just fill out this form.

    • Like 2

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    2 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

    Bill Guerin owed us absolutely no explanation on things.

    Totally disagree. There was an outside investigation and 2 people are gone because of it. Of course he/they owe an explanation.

     

    3 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

    Even if the reporters asked Guerin in private what happened, they probably never were given a straight answer. So, they report nothing because there's nothing to report.

    They (reporters) probably know, or at least have a good idea. My bet is they keep quiet to keep getting access. That's understandable, but when a professional organization has an investigation for abuse of power and two people are gone because of it except the guy under investigation, an explanation is owed to the public that supports that organization.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    23 hours ago, mnfaninnc said:

    B1G, if you go back to look at my comments at the time, probably now permanently erased in the Vox black hole, I was very optimistic that we had gotten Goose2, I thought he would rebound and was in a poor situation in Ottawa, and that he did have similar stats to The Wall in the SHL. Obviously, Guerin had more information than I did in a quick little statistical search. 

    Yep, I remember. You definitely called that one! I had my doubts but you were proven right. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    13 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

    They (reporters) probably know, or at least have a good idea. My bet is they keep quiet to keep getting access. That's understandable, but when a professional organization has an investigation for abuse of power and two people are gone because of it except the guy under investigation, an explanation is owed to the public that supports that organization.

    I feel like we've gotten an explanation? Otherwise how would we know what happened? We know that the FO guy is gone because he did something naughty with the books. Likely something similar to that guy in the Jags organization who was skimming off the top. 

    We also know that the staffer who filed the HR complaint felt he was verbally abused by the GM but that the team investigated, reported those results to the league, and neither felt it was to the level of a necessary termination. 

    Sometimes personalities just don't mesh in a workplace and eventually those issues reach a tipping point. Do we really need the nitty gritty details of what exactly was said, out of context? What would that achieve? 

    If it was as bad as you are trying to portray it to be, I imagine the GM would've gotten more than just a slap on the wrist considering how swiftly they canned Fenton for a similar issue. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

    I feel like we've gotten an explanation? Otherwise how would we know what happened? We know that the FO guy is gone because he did something naughty with the books. Likely something similar to that guy in the Jags organization who was skimming off the top. 

    We also know that the staffer who filed the HR complaint felt he was verbally abused by the GM but that the team investigated, reported those results to the league, and neither felt it was to the level of a necessary termination. 

    Sometimes personalities just don't mesh in a workplace and eventually those issues reach a tipping point. Do we really need the nitty gritty details of what exactly was said, out of context? What would that achieve? 

    If it was as bad as you are trying to portray it to be, I imagine the GM would've gotten more than just a slap on the wrist considering how swiftly they canned Fenton for a similar issue. 

    That's just it. Leo saving face? Two in a row? and rather abruptly I might add. And, I disagree with you. We don't know what happened.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

    I feel like we've gotten an explanation? Otherwise how would we know what happened? We know that the FO guy is gone because he did something naughty with the books. Likely something similar to that guy in the Jags organization who was skimming off the top. 

    We also know that the staffer who filed the HR complaint felt he was verbally abused by the GM but that the team investigated, reported those results to the league, and neither felt it was to the level of a necessary termination. 

    Sometimes personalities just don't mesh in a workplace and eventually those issues reach a tipping point. Do we really need the nitty gritty details of what exactly was said, out of context? What would that achieve? 

    If it was as bad as you are trying to portray it to be, I imagine the GM would've gotten more than just a slap on the wrist considering how swiftly they canned Fenton for a similar issue. 

    Great post.  And my response in no way is a counter point.  BG has been earmarked as team USA GM for years now so he’s a little bit untouchable right now.  But if investigations become a pattern, knee jerk trading players in a huff become a pattern, unforced errors (5 yr extensions with no move clauses for fringe nhl’rs) become a pattern BG won’t be untouchable forever

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, Pewterschmidt said:

    Great post.  And my response in no way is a counter point.  BG has been earmarked as team USA GM for years now so he’s a little bit untouchable right now.  But if investigations become a pattern, knee jerk trading players in a huff become a pattern, unforced errors (5 yr extensions with no move clauses for fringe nhl’rs) become a pattern BG won’t be untouchable forever

    No one in professional sports is untouchable my man. They're all hired to be fired eventually. I don't know that Leipold would care about Team USA too much (its not like he makes money off that) to spare Billy some egg on his face if he deserved to be fired. 

    To Guerin's credit the Freddy G contract is probably the worst move he's made and its just a $2.1M AAV. As much as the dead-cap from the buyouts suck this year, and will next year, it was an unfortunately necessary move that we knew would be due eventually as soon as we signed Parise and Suter to those contracts in 2012. 

    Given that reality, I think what he's been able to do in the years since has been pretty outstanding. Its been rough this year but that's mainly due to the record during the rash of injuries, paired with the slow start under a coach the team tuned out, rather than any individual roster decisions he made. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    31 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

    That's understandable, but when a professional organization has an investigation for abuse of power and two people are gone because of it except the guy under investigation, an explanation is owed to the public that supports that organization.

    Legally speaking, the investigation was not compulsory.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    22 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

    That's just it. Leo saving face? Two in a row? and rather abruptly I might add. And, I disagree with you. We don't know what happened.

    We don't know specific details, and likely never will, but we know what happened. 

    Given that its been 4 years since we fired Fenton, I wouldn't consider that abrupt myself. Leipold didn't waste any time kicking Fenton to the curb when he learned he was creating a toxic workplace, but for Billy he'll make an exception? Idk man.. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

    We don't know specific details, and likely never will, but we know what happened. 

    Given that its been 4 years since we fired Fenton, I wouldn't consider that abrupt myself. Leipold didn't waste any time kicking Fenton to the curb when he learned he was creating a toxic workplace, but for Billy he'll make an exception? Idk man.. 

    Maybe not abrupt but two in a row for lack of self control, not a good look no matter how you spin it. With Fenton it was internal, with BG we see it publicly which leads me to believe it's likely worse behind closed doors. Yes, I think he made the exception to save face.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    39 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

    I don't know that Leipold would care about Team USA too much (its not like he makes money off that) to spare Billy some egg on his face if he deserved to be fired.

    I was referring to the investigation being presented to the league and the NHL saying "nothing to see here."  If BG is a re-tread GM on back nine of his career in a crap market with a crap org. maybe the league rules differently.  My point is given the BG's circumstances a dismissal of charges by NHL doesn't mean 100% vindication.  There may be some fire around BG, not just smoke.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 minutes ago, Pewterschmidt said:

    I was referring to the investigation being presented to the league and the NHL saying "nothing to see here."  If BG is a re-tread GM on back nine of his career in a crap market with a crap org. maybe the league rules differently.  My point is given the BG's circumstances a dismissal of charges by NHL doesn't mean 100% vindication.  There may be some fire around BG, not just smoke.

    But I hear that Gary Bettman hates MN so why wouldn't he try to make us look bad?! 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, B1GKappa97 said:

    But I hear that Gary Bettman hates MN so why wouldn't he try to make us look bad?! 

    Because BG was the defacto Team USA GM (or maybe it had already been announced).  Why would Bettman give the NHL that black eye (Team USA is a proxy for the NHL).  Let Team Canada get all the negative PR for now.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    32 minutes ago, Pewterschmidt said:

    please explain what this means to us non-law talkin' types

    The investigation was self imposed so there is no obligation to let us hockey wilderness dudes in on it.

    • Like 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 hours ago, Willy the poor boy said:

    Totally disagree. There was an outside investigation and 2 people are gone because of it. Of course he/they owe an explanation.

     

    They (reporters) probably know, or at least have a good idea. My bet is they keep quiet to keep getting access. That's understandable, but when a professional organization has an investigation for abuse of power and two people are gone because of it except the guy under investigation, an explanation is owed to the public that supports that organization.

    Willy do you ever let up? We all get it. You have a big time dislike for BG. Did BG screw up? Yep, he probably did. Does it happen anywhere else? Yep, all the time. Is it not the perfect deal? Yep again. 

    I truly doubt you will ever get the answer you apparently need so much. How about everyone just moves on and lets the sand flow through the hour glass?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    14 minutes ago, Up North Guy said:

    Willy do you ever let up? We all get it. You have a big time dislike for BG. Did BG screw up? Yep, he probably did. Does it happen anywhere else? Yep, all the time. Is it not the perfect deal? Yep again. 

    I truly doubt you will ever get the answer you apparently need so much. How about everyone just moves on and lets the sand flow through the hour glass?

    I didn't bring it up, someone else did, and yes I'm gonna respond just like you responded anytime someone mentioned Deano had to go. Please explain the difference to me.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    27 minutes ago, Willy the poor boy said:

    I didn't bring it up, someone else did, and yes I'm gonna respond just like you responded anytime someone mentioned Deano had to go. Please explain the difference to me.

    Touche' I guess

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 hours ago, Will D. Ness said:

    The investigation was self imposed so there is no obligation to let us hockey wilderness dudes in on it.

    This is about as good as layman's terms ever get!!!!!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    17 hours ago, Up North Guy said:

    Willy do you ever let up? We all get it.

    There is only one solution: Willy mutates into a fly and is the fly on the wall in the FO when this is discussed. While there, though, perhaps we can get some insight on who they are looking to trade for, and who they like in the draft! 😉

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...